Veteran cryptographer Nick Szabo, widely known for coining the concept of smart contracts and for developing Bit Gold, an early version of Bitcoin, argued that BTC might not be as resilient against network attacks as many individuals had anticipated. Szabo further explained that although the cryptocurrency operates with reduced trust, it does not mean that it can completely work without trust. He argues that , despite Bitcoin’s architecture being designed for “trust minimization,” a less-discussed layer of residual trust remains embedded in the system. The pioneer also pointed out the possibility of Bitcoin being attacked by big companies and governments. In a post on X, Szabo highlighted a “legal attack” surface for every digital currency and layer‑1 network, suggesting that government actions could significantly disrupt cryptocurrency operations. Szabo’s reference to a “legal attack” surface brings to the fore scenarios in which governments may attack critical infrastructure , such as miners, node operators, or custodial services. These actions may involve, among other things, imposing fines, regulating transaction types, or attempting to censor specific network activities, especially where compliance is very demanding. “Thinking that Bitcoin or any blockchain protocol is a magical anarcho-capitalist tool that can resist any kind of government attack in all legal areas is crazy,” he added. Szabo says BTC cannot resist attacks, as many people believe As an early developer of smart contracts in the cryptocurrency world, Szabo’s views are highly respected within the ecosystem. He sounds his alarm as a reminder that Bitcoin’s security and decentralization are not completely absolute. Some crypto investors have wondered whether the cryptocurrency pioneer could be the elusive Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin. They based their reasoning on the fact that Szabo conceptualized the idea of Bit Gold back in 1988. Notably, the identity of the person or group who adopted this name remains a mystery. Additionally, sources with knowledge on the situation pointed out that the name was chosen to ensure Bitcoin remained decentralized and prevent any organization from acquiring too much power. This topic ignited heated debates among crypto users. When reporters reached out to Szabo to comment on the matter, he denied being Nakamoto. Meanwhile, the Bitcoin supporter explained in a follow-up post that governments might join forces to take action against Bitcoin miners, node operators, and wallet service providers in areas where the law is strictly adhered to. He particularly pointed out “arbitrary data” and emphasized the likelihood of some content being removed if regulators pressure network users to change the network. It is worth noting that the ongoing discussion between Bitcoin Core and Knots has lasted for months. These discussions have primarily focused on whether non-financial content should be considered part of the Bitcoin ecosystem through Ordinals, Runes, and BRC-20 transactions. These non-financial content include images, videos, and audio. Szabo encountered criticism from several members of the Bitcoin community Recent reports indicate that Bitcoin Knots has expanded its market foothold among node validators. This move occurred after some Bitcoin users disapproved of how Bitcoin Core developers added the OP_RETURN function, leading to more “spam” on the Bitcoin network. On the other hand, Szabo encountered criticism from several Bitcoin community members, including Chris Seedor, CEO of Seedor, a company that offers storage for Bitcoin seeds. Based on his argument, Seedor mentioned that Szabo exaggerated the influence of speculative “legal boogeymen.” According to the CEO, “Bitcoin’s strength has never been about predicting every legal situation — it’s about reducing technical issues where force can be applied.” He also mentioned that if regulators had the power, they would have closed down PGP, Tor, and similar protocols. Get up to $30,050 in trading rewards when you join Bybit today
